OK, I though a lot about the last posts, and I think it all boils down to this.

Facts
Every living system and living ecosystem on Earth is in a state of decline, due to our economic activities. There is no debate about that, every scientific paper published in the last 30 years confirms it. It's abundantly clear that a different approach is to be put in place.

Proposals
I propose we try to approach the problems scientifically, evaluate what causes negative retroactions, try to prevent them through education, non violent and non coercive manners, strive for a dynamic equilibrium with nature, use a systemic approach and adapt our ways of lives so that they are aligned with what the planet can provide, in order to ensure our long term survival.

I am seeing this wrong? (Of course you are going to say yes straight away, but think about it for a few days, then come back and tell me).

Michele1940 Answer:

Well here we have : misaligned incentives, negative externalities that cause negative retro actions. Can't the common cause of all this be called greediness ?

Seeking for a dynamic equilibrium with nature is definitely a good path to follow. Since from nature itself we can actually see that there are no misaligned incentives, no negative externalities and , therefore no greediness. Nature appears to evolve by itself in a way that the whole ecosystem is always in a state of development ( evolution ) rather than declining.

Economic activities are not a natural process. But, by all means, are perpetuated by Humans since " Illo Tempore ".

Humans are surely part of the natural ecosystem of this planet. And surely denote a much higher degree of awareness as compared to any other natural kingdom. Also they denote a freewill that allows them, for example, to elaborate economic activities able to "alter" the whole ecosystem.

In seeking for this "miraculous" to happen, that we can all live a sustainable life by better rationing all available resources and bla bla bla, we should not forget, in my opinion, that this freewill, is applicable also to the individuals. Therefore making each of us capable of taking different decisions.

The main problem than, melts down to a matter of awareness : if you are not aware that you are doing something wrong, how can you possibly decide to do it in a different way ?

The above is my attempt to give a sort of "scientific" explanation. But I would have preferred a more philosophical one